Chicago Whistleblower Lawyer Michael Rosenblat

CALL NOW FOR A FREE CASE EVALUATION

(312) 948-0006

The firm handles legal matters primarily in the following practice areas: Criminal and Civil Litigation.

As an attorney, I strive to provide my clients with the best representation possible. My clients are treated as individuals, kept informed as to the status of their case, the evidence, and the likely outcome. This allows my clients to make informed decisions as to his or her rights.

How can Mr. Rosenblat help?

Mr. Rosenblat is an experienced and respected attorney in whistleblower and qui tam litigation. Mr. Rosenblat served as the deputy chief of the Illinois Attorney General's Medicaid Fraud Control Unit and has represented the state and/or the whistleblower relators in cases which have resulted in significant settlements or verdicts. Contact Mr. Rosenblat if you believe that you may have the factual basis to bring a whistleblower lawsuit.

Suits brought by a Qui Tam Plaintiff

When a private person brings an action under the Whistleblower Reward and Protection Act, numerous procedural obstacles must be successfully negotiated. Failure to negotiate these obstacles can lead to the relator's case being dismissed or the whistleblower being dismissed with the State taking over the action. The State can of course proceed without a whistleblower and settle the case without having to award the private person an award.

A private person bringing an action must closely follow the filing and service provisions of the Whistleblower Reward and Protection Act. Section 4(b)(2) requires that "a copy of the complaint, a written disclosure of substantially all material evidence and information that a person possesses shall be served on the State. The complaint shall be filed in camera, shall remain under seal for at least 60 days, and shall not be served on the defendant until the court so orders." Failure to follow these filing and service requirements could result in the relator's case being dismissed. Even if the private person's case is dismissed, the State could still intervene and take over the action by filing its own complaint or simply adopting the complaint filed by the private person.

In Pilon v. Martin Marietta Corp., the defendants Martin Marietta and General Electric appealed a judgment dismissing the Pilons' complaint without prejudice, contending that the complaint should have been dismissed with prejudice because the Pilons' failed to follow the filing and service provisions of the Federal False Claims Act. The court held that the False Claims Act counts of the complaint should have been dismissed with prejudice, because the plaintiffs did not take steps to have the complaint filed under seal neither did they serve a copy of the complaint and the material evidence on the government. While the court stated that the legislative history of the False Claims Act's 1986 amendments were "to encourage more private enforcement suits" the government was concerned with private suits alerting defendants to ongoing or potential investigations. Therefore, the sealing of the complaint provision was enacted to permit the government time to evaluate the allegation and conduct an investigation. Furthermore, defendants maybe more willing to reach an expeditious settlement with the government prior to the case being unsealed. "The Pilons' failure to comply with the service provision incurably frustrated all of these interests."

Once the complaint has been properly filed a copy of the complaint along with ”written disclosure of substantially all material evidence and information the person possesses shall be served on the State.”

Regarding the requirement that material evidence be served on the State, there is no clear definition as to the precise meaning of the phase ”material evidence.” However, practically, the better this evidence is organized and presented to the Attorney General, the more likely the Attorney General's Office will devote resources to investigate and ultimately intervene in the action. State intervention is critical to a successful prosecution. Over 80% of the cases in which the government declines intervention are voluntarily dismissed by the whistleblower.

For more information on Whistleblower laws in Chicago Illinois, please visit www.rosenblatlaw.com.

Biography

WLS Radio Rohm and Roeper Show to speak about the Rod Blagojevich trial, July 30, 2010. "Heat on Government Sponsored Health Care Plans - False Claims Act Litigation", MCO Roundtable, presented by HRH (Willis), Nov 2008; "Search & Seizure Updates", Solo and Small Firm Committee, Chicago Bar Association, 2006; Co-Author: "Prosecuting a Claim Under the Illinois Whistleblower Reward and Protection Act," Employment Termination, IICLE, 2002, updated 2005; "The Attorney General's Medicaid Fraud Unit, Prosecuting Health Care Fraud" the Small Hospital Compliance Seminar, 1998, Illinois Hospital and Health Systems Association, Health Care Compliance Plans: Spanning the Continuum, 1998; "Filing a False Claims Case in the Northern District of Illinois," Chicago Bar Association, Committee on Federal Civil Procedure, 2000; "False Claims and Class Actions," Chicago Bar Association, Committee of Class Actions, 2001. Judge Advocate General, 1990-1993. Assistant Illinois Attorney General, 1993-2001 (including Deputy Bureau Chief, Criminal Prosecution, Deputy Bureau Chief, Special Litigation and Deputy Bureau Chief, Medicaid Fraud Unit).